ONTD to blame for "What's Wrong with Social Media"

[ty]

Comments

[celja]

It's our fault social media in general don't have proper moderators? Did I understand that right? (it's hard to read the last photo).

[theoryofwar]

I think so! I had no idea we were so powerful!

[duchello]

I mean "we" were to an extent. There were major publications that full on banned their website to be used as a source because it was deemed a threat to the web hits, it's why the comm doesn't allow hotlinking of images. It seems pretty silly today because Reddit is so big now but this comm had a lot of influence/traffic for pop culture discussions. (Ugh this comment reads very.. "in MY day" I've been on here too long)

[theoryofwar]

I'm laughing at the back in my day part because same 😂. I'm just thinking of us as of now compared to sites like reddit and the farms now.

[xdeedots]

https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit/comments/10h2fz7/reddits_defense_of_section_230_to_the_supreme/

This reddit post from Jan 2023 describes what section 230 is:

TL;DR: The Supreme Court is hearing for the first time a case regarding Section 230, a decades-old internet law that provides important legal protections for anyone who moderates, votes on, or deals with other people’s content online. The Supreme Court has never spoken on 230, and the plaintiffs are arguing for a narrow interpretation of 230. To fight this, Reddit, alongside several moderators, have jointly filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing in support of Section 230

[xliquidskiesx]

I think Penny wants them to be liable..

[blackstarnebula]

Yes and no. The way I’m reading it, their argument is that it is because of this judgment from a livejournal case that companies don’t invest in content moderation. That’s because the more content moderation they show they’re capable of doing - the more it opens up them being held liable for their user’s behavior, esp regarding copyright. The judge had said that if you can afford to hire someone to enforce content moderation, then you can afford someone to handle copyright infringement. There you’re liable for the copyright infringement for not doing your due diligence.

I’m not sure I buy that but I do know internet company do not want to be held liable for user behavior- despite making all their money off these users and their content.

[rubie_dubidoux]

this is more or less what I got from it too. even though ONTD is fairly small-time in the grand scheme of things, the point where we couldn’t post full articles anymore and all that was a pretty big deal… but I can’t remember where that fell on our timeline with Brenden being a paid employee

[glitterslugs]

Our impakt!!!

[distant_lines]

Can I put this on my LinkedIn?

[celja]

I'm putting it on my gravestone.

[tanglespiders]

well, they also don’t want to pay them, period, and moderation was lax on major social media sites before mavrix. the decision came in 2017. it’s not like sites had active, employed moderation before then.